About a month after two public defenders started to ask questions about the St. Paul police crime lab, the assistant police chief who oversees the lab wrote in an email, "The ship doesn't change course in a day, but it will change course! (the issue was ten years in the making)."

Kathy Wuorinen also noted in the May 3 message to a police officer who works in the crime lab, "I wasn't kidding when I said those who don't jump on board will not be staying. I will keep tabs on things."

A hearing in Dakota County court that began in July disclosed flawed drug-testing practices at the St. Paul police crime lab. Police Chief Thomas Smith then halted drug testing and fingerprint analysis there, and prosecutors took their testing elsewhere. Recently, the lab has resumed fingerprint analysis by certified analysts, police spokesman Howie Padilla said Wednesday, Jan. 16.

A judge is considering admissibility of suspected drug evidence processed by the lab in four cases.

Public defenders Lauri Traub and Christine Funk met with a crime lab worker about a case March 30. What they heard at the meeting was the attorneys' first indication something was wrong. That led them to ask more questions, which ultimately led to the drug-evidence hearing, Traub said Wednesday.

Shortly after the March 30 meeting, at least two lab employees expressed concerns to Wuorinen.

On April 12, Sgt. Greg Gravesen sent the assistant chief an email.

"I would like to meet with you to discuss my future with the crime lab.

Advertisement

I have some serious concerns about the situation and specifically how they may potentially affect me and my career." Gravesen, who does crime scene and crash reconstruction, didn't detail his concerns in the email, among the latest batch of emails released by St. Paul police Wednesday in response to media requests.

Then, on May 3, officer Jamie Sipes wrote to Wuorinen about an offer she'd extended at an April 30 meeting -- that crime lab employees could contact her with issues for one week, after which they should continue to follow their chain of command. Sipes said he wanted to take advantage of the offer, and three paragraphs followed, which the police department redacted, saying it was nonpublic personnel data.

Sipes concluded, "I want to be an instrument for change as much as the other employees of the crime lab. I have seen a positive change in attitudes and a genuine excitement about the future. I don't want to be a part of our current dysfunction. You spoke of where we are. Where we are going and how we are going to get there. It is my sincere concern and observation that not all of us are on board with this plan."

Wuorinen wrote back to Sipes the same day, thanking him for his insight. In that email she referred to changing the ship's course. She told him, "You were a breath of fresh air and I want to keep the momentum going. We hit a snag with this whole Dakota County Deal but we will get through."

People in the lab had been "buzzing" about the April 30 meeting before it happened, Gravesen wrote to Wuorinen the morning of April 30. He told her, "There will be apprehension to (workers) being open with sergeants present. They may have things that Shay (Shackle) and I are doing that could be improved but they won't say because of fear of retaliation."

Shackle, a police sergeant, was the head of the crime lab at the time and had been the longtime director. Smith reassigned Shackle on July 30.

The police department had been working to update its standard operating procedures before the hearing started. Jennifer Jannetto, a criminalist who worked in the crime lab, wrote in a June email to Sipes that she was working on the appendices of the standard operating procedures. Sipes had forwarded the procedures to someone at FQS, which appears to refer to Forensic Quality Services, a national accreditation board.

"Also, can you ask if he's familiar with the drug testing portion of a lab?" wrote Jannetto, who supervised the lab's drug analysts at the time. "Until this hearing is done and over with, I'm at a loss as to what changes we should make and the weight of each (i.e. running a blank before each sample, what the heck a contamination log is, etc.)."

Shackle acknowledged at a hearing last summer that Jannetto had more training in latent fingerprint examination than in analyzing drug evidence. Civilian criminalists who had been doing testing and analysis no longer work at the lab because testing hasn't been recently done, Padilla said.

The city of St. Paul announced Friday it was seeking a new police crime lab director.

The announcement said qualified candidates must have seven years of experience in an accredited lab. They must also possess national drug analysis or latent print examination certification.

The St. Paul lab is not accredited currently.

But in April, Gravesen wrote an email to Wuorinen with the subject line "Update."

He said Sipes "has been given the task to research the accreditation issue." Sipes issued a report on the subject June 19. It addressed needed changes in the lab, including adding a secure area to handle evidence and suspected drugs.

Wuorinen also told staff in a May 24 email that "there will be a concerted effort to increase the level of training of lab employees."

Consultants whom St. Paul hired to work on improving the lab are the certified analysts who recently started doing the fingerprint analysis, Padilla said.

Updated standard operating procedures for the lab will be put in place with the help of the consultants, he said.

The consultants' final reports are expected to be made public within weeks.